what, pray tell, is the difference between "body mechanics" and "technique"?

Technique is simply the action itself, wether a punch, choke etc.

Body mechanics is what is going on in the rest of the body besides the limbs involved in the technique itself. Think skeletal alingment, involvment of other muscle groups, weight transfer etc. This also results in more force beling delivered into your opponent instead of back into you. If you want to see it from an engineering viewpoint just google "free body diagram."

Going back to the golf swing analogy, the body mechanics behind the swing involves more than just using the muscles of the arms.

If you want a better discussion of it, ask Upyu, he has a far better grasp of it than me and how to apply it to ground fighting.

as to your example, of course the body mechanics of a golf swing involve far more than the use of the arms alone. the hips, the head, the wrists etc. are all crucially involved--but the totality of that body involvement IS the technique; you can't isolate it to the arm muscles, and no instructor would ever try to do so. the same is true of any groundfighting application--proper alignment and integration of virtually every part of the body is critical to the success of an armbar, a sweep, a triangle etc. you can't sensibly parse technique as just "the limbs involved." if your entire body doesn't know what it's doing, your technique is going to be ****, period. I simply don't get the distinction you're trying to draw.

as to your example, of course the body mechanics of a golf swing involve far more than the use of the arms alone. the hips, the head, the wrists etc. are all crucially involved--but the totality of that body involvement IS the technique; you can't isolate it to the arm muscles, and no instructor would ever try to do so. the same is true of any groundfighting application--proper alignment and integration of virtually every part of the body is critical to the success of an armbar, a sweep, a triangle etc. you can't sensibly parse technique as just "the limbs involved." if your entire body doesn't know what it's doing, your technique is going to be ****, period. I simply don't get the distinction you're trying to draw.

Ok, outside of internal martial arts, I haven't heard any instructor make any distinction regarding alignment of the spine, being aware what is going on in your upper body when using your lower body and vice versa. That is to say the result of preforming the technique on your own body rather than only on your opponents and involving far more core strength.

Looking at highly experienced guys, they all seem to do it, so it seems to be something they pick up on their own, rather than being taught.

A far better discussion of the topic can be found in the following thread:

Its basically along the lines of what Arsenio Advicula taught while coaching the Chargers back in the 80's. While attending the seminar, he said that the guys who made the connection of what he was teaching had longer careers on average than those who didn't.

Perhaps the following comment might clarify it a bit?

Originally Posted by DdlR

Johnny,

I think that's because people are often looking for specific techniques, which is fair enough - using the trick/game/exercise shown in the video clip as an example, you're never going to get anyone in a real fight into that position, so what's the point of practicing like that?

The answer is that the exercise, as artificial as the set-up is, teaches a skill-set that can be applied to plenty of techniques. For one thing, you can't succeed as the defender in that exercise if you're trying to out-muscle the other guy. It literally forces you to employ core strength rather than, say, just arm and shoulder strength, and to connect the power bases of the lower and upper bodies together. Likewise, if you master the exercise, you develop a keen sense of tactile sensitivity, balance, leverage and especially of combining all of these into redirections; tricking the opponent into over-committing his weight and momentum, and how to take advantage of that by turning, suddenly yielding, etc.

Every martial art from Aikido to BJJ uses those principles in a wide range of techniques, but they are usually taught and learned by osmosis - if the student gets good enough at the techniques, they eventually pick up the principle by default. Along the way, though, many people struggle with aspects of the techniques for various reasons, most commonly because they are relying more on sheer muscle power than on posture/alignment/"feeling" etc. supported by muscle power. Exercises like that shown in the video can be a short cut to understanding these principles because they isolate the basic mechanics.

The real "trick" is to explain and teach these exercises in a way that clarifies the connection between general principle and specific technique; if that doesn't happen, then the exercise often becomes simple showmanship.

I've never participated in, seen, or heard of any sport or MA that didn't stress the importance of overall body mechanics to the proper execution of technique. I'm a good golfer, a former college tennis player, swim coach & baseball player; I've lifted weights, boxed, trained a bit in judo, wasted three years in TKD, gotten my blue in BJJ, and played the usual amount of HS basketball, football & the like. I can't think of a single one of those in which serious, competent training doesn't emphasize the vital role of overall body mechanics to performance. Are you hinting at the existence of some secret "internal knowledge" that enhaces performance?

I haven't heard any instructor make any distinction regarding alignment of the spine, being aware what is going on in your upper body when using your lower body and vice versa.

That's funny. One of the first things a purple belt taught me about BJJ was that it's like being a drummer in a band--most of the time your arms and legs will be doing something completely different, but both are needed in order to perform the technique.

Every martial art from Aikido to BJJ uses those principles in a wide range of techniques, but they are usually taught and learned by osmosis - if the student gets good enough at the techniques, they eventually pick up the principle by default. Along the way, though, many people struggle with aspects of the techniques for various reasons, most commonly because they are relying more on sheer muscle power than on posture/alignment/"feeling" etc. supported by muscle power.

this is directly counter not only to my entire experience of BJJ but also to the entire BJJ paradigm, which is predicated on the mastery of very specific, highly detailed techniques involving the entire body to offset muscle power. no good BJJ instructor expects students to learn the mechanics of a technique "by osmosis"; it's extraordinarily technical, painstaking instruction in which the precise positioning of virtually every body part is vital. I can only conclude, frankly, that the writer of those words has never trained in BJJ or any similar highly technical grappling art.

I've never participated in, seen, or heard of any sport or MA that didn't stress the importance of overall body mechanics to the proper execution of technique. I'm a good golfer, a former college tennis player, swim coach & baseball player; I've lifted weights, boxed, trained a bit in judo, wasted three years in TKD, gotten my blue in BJJ, and played the usual amount of HS basketball, football & the like. I can't think of a single one of those in which serious, competent training doesn't emphasize the vital role of overall body mechanics to performance. Are you hinting at the existence of some secret "internal knowledge" that enhaces performance?

I dont think it is secret at all, in fact it is in plain sight, its just I dont think most people make the mental connection at all if ever. After years of experience, their body most likely understands it, but unless they have had that "aha" momment, I don't think they can explain it to someone else.

I certainly didn't until someone explained it to me. I never understood that what I thought was straight wasn't really straight.

If you read the 100kg thread I posted, there are body training exercises out there that can help you understand the effects of preforming a technique on your own body. Plus there is commentary by people with far more experience than me, and who have had far more success applying it to the ground.

Again, I have been taught by plenty of teachers of how the preformance of a technique effects my opponent. I have been taught how performance of a technique incorrectly can result in injury to myself. I have been taught that overcommiting or becoming unballanced can allow my own force to be used against me or allow for an opening. There is no secret there, as you said, just about every coach instructs their players what to look for in the above.

Untill more recently, no one ever showed me how performance of a technique allows for force to go back into me, and how to optimize more of that force to go into my opponent. Likewise, through the same sort of training, how it becomes more difficult to become more unbalanced, and how to make the body more aware to correct it. Note there is no mystical energy involved, just more awareness of what is going on in your own body.

After 13 years of various martial arts, that was a pretty big revelation. This sort of training seems to shortcut some aspects of repeative training of a technique, and seems to carry over to just about any physical activity.

If you already have that knowledge then thats great. It seems to be the same stuff all the internal guys work on developing.

this is directly counter not only to my entire experience of BJJ but also to the entire BJJ paradigm, which is predicated on the mastery of very specific, highly detailed techniques involving the entire body to offset muscle power. no good BJJ instructor expects students to learn the mechanics of a technique "by osmosis"; it's extraordinarily technical, painstaking instruction in which the precise positioning of virtually every body part is vital. I can only conclude, frankly, that the writer of those words has never trained in BJJ or any similar highly technical grappling art.

I think you missunderstood what the guy mean't by osmosis. He was referring to the effects on your own body of the technique.

In my own opinion, this sort of stuff is probably easier to recognize on your own through grappling rather than striking simply because you are in contact more with your opponent.

what, pray tell, is the difference between "body mechanics" and "technique"?

In this context, I'm guessing that 'body mechanics' refers to how you body is held upon execution, whereas 'technique' is more directly related to whichever action is being performed. In other words, body mechanics is a more holistic term than technique which can be narrowed to specific properties directly related to an action being performed. Again, this is very context-dependent; I'm sure the terms could be used interchangably elsewhere.

For example, if I throw a side-kick at an shield, I would describe the 'technique' aspect as all of the actions directly related to the act of extending my leg and angling my foot. The body mechanics, on the other hand, would be more of the orientation of my entire body, the movement of my body mass, and the connections (or lack thereof) throughout.

In this context, I would keep in mind how many IMA stress the power generation groundpath. That is more of a discussion of body mechanics as it is related to orientation and movement as a whole.

It's easy to argue the overlap and ambiguities between body mechanics and technique, but it seems like something that is easier felt than explained. Does this help?

*edit - I evidently didn't read the rest of the thread after your question, but I'll leave my two cents in for discussion's sake.